Judge Hlophe is accused of attempting to influence the Constitutional Court's decision over search and seizure raids carried out by the Scorpions on properties of Jacob Zuma and French arms manufacturing giant Thint.
On Friday, the Concourt released a statement that a complaint had been referred to the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) following allegations that "Judge John Hlophe, has approached some of the judges of the Constitutional Court in an improper attempt to influence this Court's pending judgment in one or more cases..." The statement did not reveal which of the 11 Concourt judges had allegedly been approached by Hlophe, but it did say that "the complaint relates to the matters of Thint (Pty) Ltd v National Director of Public Prosecutions and Others (CCT 89/07), JG Zuma and Another v National Director of Public Prosecutions and Others (CCT 91/07), Thint Holdings (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd and Another v National Director of Public Prosecutions (CCT 90/07) and JG Zuma v National Director of Public Prosecutions (CCT 92/07)." The cases were heard by the Court in Johannesburg between 11 and 14 March and related to controversial search and seizure raids at properties belonging to Zuma in Gauteng and KwaZulu-Natal and at the Durban office of his attorney Michael Hulley on 18 August 2005. A ruling has yet to be made. Appealing the raids judgmentZuma, Hulley and Thint have argued that they should be granted leave to appeal against a 8 November 2006 majority judgment of the Supreme Court of Appeal that upheld the raids.
The raids were carried out two months after Judge Hilary Squires convicted Zuma's former confidante and financial adviser Schabir Shaik on two counts of corruption and one count of fraud in the Durban High Court. The corruption charges related to Shaik's attempt to solicit a R500 000 a year bribe from French arms manufacturing giant Thales International (formerly Thomson CSF) for Zuma. The Concourt statement said: "We stress that there is no suggestion that any of the litigants in the cases referred to ... was aware of or instigated this action." It further said: "The judges of this Court view conduct of this nature in a very serious light."Sapa